> Well, my understanding of the prologue is that IF we want to assign a WHEN
> to orient the tenses in it, that WHEN ought to be either the time of
> composition OR the time (each time) it is being read.

This particular present tense [FANEI] just sticks out like a very sore
thumb, grammatically.

I emphatically do not buy the idea that it is either the time [each
time] the composition is being read, or the time when it was written.

This present tense stands virtually on its own.

But WHEN?? When indeed!! Did it START shining some time back??
Eh??? ... NO. Why? Because EN ARCH HN hO LOGOS. The Logos WAS BEING
[already] IN the ARCH of time ~ It precedes the origin and genesis of
time. It is timeless, and this little sentence states this fact in
the simple sentence 'The Light in the darkness is shining.' The
ongoing present tense is the only one that catches the timeless
permanence of this 'shining'. No other tense CAN do this. Why is
this so hard?? We simply do not understand the tense power of the
Greek verb.

This shining of the Light has no beginning, nor any end, folks ~
Because the Logos WAS in the genesis of time, and that genesis CREATES
beginnings and endings, without itself being either,,, and the Logos
antecedes it [the ARCH], if that can even make sense at this level of
talking about things.

Tenses are EVERYTHING in John...

George Blaisdell

> Let's stick with the
> former, if you prefer: I understand it as a statement that is true as John
> writes it: "The light continues to shine, and the darkness didn't ever
> quench it." I would argue this at length within the framework of John's
> gospel as a whole, but I think this is not the time for it. I do think,
> however, that the various equations of LOGOS in the prologue are quite
> sufficient to allow the implication that the light did not suddenly start
> shining at whatever moment you assign to the NOW of FAINEI.